Welcome

Welcome to the POZ Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and
others concerned about HIV/AIDS. Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the
conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning: Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive
and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a
username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own
physician.

All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators
of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ community forums.

We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please
provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are
true and correct to their knowledge.

What I don't get is your interpretation of the posts to mean that there is 100% responsibility on either party. There is not. Such a responsibility is shared.

Shared.

It appears that much of this anger is really directed at yourself, for your decision to forego condoms. I really hope you manage to get past that.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

Hiv stops with ALL OF US. That is the point here. It is a shared responsibility between both positive and negative people as well as the people who don't even know their status.

This is what got me so angry about the newscast. The TOTAL responsibility was laid at the feet of positive people and they yet again missed the opportunity to make it clear to people that condoms must be used when you are not 100% certain of either party's hiv status.

It takes two to tango and the use of condoms is both partner's responsibility. We are not getting that message out. The message being put out is that you should rely on your partner's disclosure and you have no responsibility to protect yourself and that you even have the right to prosecute if you didn't bother to exercise your right to protect yourself.

Quote

It was 100% on me....

No. To be blunt, it was 50% on you. Just as it was 50% on me when I did not insist on condoms.

To agree to have unprotected intercourse is to consent to the possibility of being infected with a sexually transmitted disease. It really is as stark and simple as that.

You might as well put a gun loaded with one bullet in someone's hand and say "go ahead, see if the bullet is in the firing chamber".

Sure, this woman was responsible for infecting her lover, but he was equally responsible for letting it happen.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Hiv stops with ALL OF US. That is the point here. It is a shared responsibility between both positive and negative people as well as the people who don't even know their status.

This is what got me so angry about the newscast. The TOTAL responsibility was laid at the feet of positive people and they yet again missed the opportunity to make it clear to people that condoms must be used when you are not 100% certain of either party's hiv status.

It takes two to tango and the use of condoms is both partner's responsibility. We are not getting that message out. The message being put out is that you should rely on your partner's disclosure and you have no responsibility to protect yourself and that you even have the right to prosecute if you didn't bother to exercise your right to protect yourself.

No. To be blunt, it was 50% on you. Just as it was 50% on me when I did not insist on condoms.

Sorry Tom, but I agree with Ann, and as such I had to quote her here. She's spot on.

Tom, you chose not to use a condom, so you are 50% responsible... and it is my firm belief that if there had been more messages put out there in the past that condoms are needed to protect oneself, I probably would have chosen to use one. Instead, it wasn't made a big deal and therefore I chose not to use a condom and was infected sometime in 1986, a time when not much was really known. Yes, 50% of my infection was because of my own ignorance and lack of knowldege. And that knowledge is still not out there completely after all these years... that is the saddest part of all. KNOWLEDGE IS POWER... and the chance to get that knowledge out there is always being lost, as is the case here. For shame.

Logged

"People grow through experience if they meet life honestly and courageously. This is how character is buit." Eleanor Roosevelt

...but really want to know what you feel should be done if I knowingly infect someone.

I think what she did was wrong. The disagreement is whether or not this is a matter for the criminal courts. I personally don't think so. But I can see why some believe that such actions should be prosecuted, as I'm uncomfortable with the notion that there are (or should be) no repercussions for that kind of behaviour. But maybe there are repercussions. I'm sure it's not easy for her to live with her actions, knowing the pain she has caused a loved one. Or maybe this should be a civil matter. Actually I'm surprised this hasn't become a civil matter, especially in the US. Everything else has.

Actually, the biggest part of MY point is that until we stop laying all the blame on positive people and getting the message out that To agree to have unprotected intercourse is to consent to the possibility of being infected with a sexually transmitted disease, we are going to continue to have these cases brought before the court.

What initially pissed ME off so much about this whole thing was that instead of presenting the case as "woman jailed - EVERYONE must be using condoms", they presented it as "you positive preditors better watch your ass your you'll end up in jail".

Instead of people thinking "I better start using condoms" they think "hiv positive people should be locked up."

I hope I've made my self clear this time.

The only way we are really going to avoid these cases happening is to make sure people understand that it is their own responsibility to protect themselves against hiv infection.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

My responsibility does lie 50% with me, if not more, that much I agree on. If I tell someone that I am negative when i know I am positive...then in my opinion I deserve to be jailed.. Hell I could meet some woman, court her for a straight year... lets get real outlandish here... she could only want to give it up on our wedding night, I mean I could hide my status.... it can and has been done! She has the utmost trust in me! I screw her silly on our wedding night and low and behold not only is she pregnant but she has another present growing inside her now. Should she bear responsibility? Trusting my slick ass? Would this scenario facilitate jail, in you opinion ?

Are there scenarios... that you all feel differently on.. or is it the same across the board?

Here's the thing Tom. If we were to concentrate on getting the message out that condoms must be used for anal or vaginal intercourse, every time, no exceptions, until such time as you are in a securely monogamous relationship WHERE BOTH PARTNERS HAVE TESTED NEGATIVE FOR ALL STIs TOGETHERbefore the condoms come off...

THEN THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR ANYONE TO GO TO JAIL.

Except where there has been unprotected intercourse without consent, which of course is rape.

I'm not arguing whether or not it is right that this woman (or anyone else who has been convicted of similar offences) has been convicted and jailed.

What I am saying is that we have to start insisting that there is a vast improvement in hiv prevention messages.

I'm saying that the media must stop portraying us as predators - because that is exactly how we were ALL portrayed by this newscast. Remember, this is what my original post was about. It wasn't about the conviction itself, it was about how the NEWS of the conviction was conveyed and the message it sent out - and more to the point, the message it DID NOT send out. Namely, that people must use condoms until they have tested together with their partner. Until we get that through people's heads, we will continue to have "victims" of hiv positive people passing on their virus through consensual unprotected intercourse.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

No Jon that is where you are mistaken... that part is over! My anger comes from the fact that HIV does stop with us...those that know.

If I go out and knowingly infect someone why should I not be thrown in jail?

Please Jon... I ask this question not out of anger, but really want to know what you feel should be done if I knowingly infect someone.

So Tom, using your logic, the couple of guys I may have infected when I didn't know I was HIV+ are just innocent bystanders instead of active participants? I told them I was negative because I was, according to my last HIV test. I was wrong. Who's responsible? Me or those individuals? Sure, that lady shouldn't have lied about her status; I don't think anybody is saying she is right. If negative folks never counted on or depended on disclosure, her (and my) partners wouldn't be poz, most likely. I care about myself and wear a seat belt. It's really irrelevant who's at fault when one is seriously hurt in an accident or infected with HIV. The point you're missing is that if you, me, and most of us had worn a condom, we wouldn't be HIV+ today. It's as simple as that. If a way to get negative people to wear a condom is to put most / all of the responsibility on them, I bet there would be a lot fewer infections. Responsibility for our own actions is what's missing here.

I am referring to someone like myself, who has been diagnosed and handed the results.

I am 50% responsible, more in my opinion, for having become infected myself.

I understand your points Ann, Jon, everyone.....

My whole issue falls with someone who knows they are positive... one who fully understands they are putting someone at risk....

I am fully aware that if one chooses not to use protection then they have to assume the risk....I KNOW THIS.

I don't know... Ann, I am not trying to start anything up. I am open to any and all opinions and feelings put forth... I really don't understand why I am the only one that feels this way. I say this with the utmost respect to all of you and I say so humbly... I see the passion you all have against this and wonder why is it my passion steers the other way? I mean I am positive too... I really feel someone like me who puts someone knowingly at risk deserves jail time.. I am sorry, definitely not trying to make enemies.. Maybe next year or the next I will feel differently.

Thomas

Logged

I despise the song Love is in the Air, you should too.

tendai

i agree with Ann, we all have a responsibility to protect ourselves when we have sex with someone moreso with someone whose status we dont know. i can only side with jailing of people who know of their status and rape people

It seems to me that this shows a basic lack in leadership when in comes to HIV/AIDS. Some one has to take charge with the media. There lacks a simple, consistant message. Some one at the NIH or the CDC perhaps (ID say the President but....) There needs to be an ad campaign to start showing that it is cool, and responsible, to wear a condom. Show people before "the moment" asking the very specific question: "Are you HIV POZ?" By doing that, it at least holds the partner accountable. Why not drill that message for a year. At least its SOMETHING. There is nothing now. Someone TAKE CHARGE. Until that day, I intend to tell everyone: ASK YOUR PARTNER THE QUESTION: ARE YOU HIV POZ? Hell at least its something!

I don't really think that's quite the message either. People lie and many people don't actually KNOW their hiv status. The man from whom I got my infection certainly didn't and if I had asked him, he would have said NO.

What needs to happen is not asking questions, unless the question is - "Shall we test together for hiv so we can stop using condoms?"

Once again the message needs to be -

You need to be using condoms for anal or vaginal intercourse, every time, no exceptions until such time as you are in a securely monogamous relationship where you have both tested for ALL STIs together.

To agree to have unprotected intercourse is to consent to the possibility of being infected with a sexually transmitted disease, unless you know for certain though testing together.

Relying on truthful and accurate answers to questions about someone's sexual health is nothing more than playing roulette.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

A STIFF PENIS HAS NO CONSCIENCE, AND A HUNGRY VAGINA HAS NO RELIEF!!!Obviously Ann has it right in the original post and her idea of pleading with BBC to get a brain is one we can help with. I also advocate for the same thing here in the U.S. as this type of thing is so common here in the U.S. that I am getting very tired of it. In the end, we are evolving into a place where nobody is responsible for themselves, and that is very sad.

In Love and Awe.

Logged

The Bible contains 6 admonishments to homosexuals,and 362 to heterosexuals.This doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals, It's just that they need more supervision.Lynn Lavne

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Just wanted to let you know that I have submitted a complaint just this morning. I meant to do it sooner, but hey, I get lazy sometimes... fact of the matter, I was too enraged the other day to do so. I needed to let my anger subside some before responding. I didn't want to shoot my mouth off. I think I did a good job -- no curse words. Wow, imagine that... something very hard for me to do when I'm angry. Just wanted to let you know that I did follow through and should I receive a response from the BBC, I will let you know ASAP. I also wrote that I was HIV-pos, hopefully that doesn't mean they will ignore us. We shall see...

Be well Ann, and let's try not to let this upset us too very much, even though it already has. I feel your frustration, anger and sadness Ann, I really freaking do...

Regards to you on the Rock!!

Love,

Trish

Logged

"People grow through experience if they meet life honestly and courageously. This is how character is buit." Eleanor Roosevelt

Since this topic has been bugging me to no end, I've been doing searches on Stigma and such...

I am inserting a link to an article I came across which deals with this very incident. It is from AVERT.org which is in the U.K. It relates to everything that Ann has been trying so feverishly to get across here, as well as myself. Ann, this one's for you dear. Happy reading...

Ann, I was not suggesting that my comments were supposed to be "THE MESSAGE" I totally agree with your thinking(sorry if you didn't realize that) I was just trying to add some thoughts to ADD to the debate. Sorry if you took that the wrong way. I agree, totally . I understand your frustration and anger. My thoughts were just meant for us all to realize the dialogue needs to be more prevalent. the gay community really needs to step it up. That was my point.

I wasn't angry, far from it. As I mentioned to you in a PM, I was actually glad that you brought the "ask" aspect up, because it was a chance for me to discuss why that isn't a good strategy to rely on. We see far too many people in the other side of the forum who come to us after having unprotected intercourse and often they say "I asked..." and we have to point out that people don't often know their status themselves and sometimes people lie as well. I'm sorry if you had the impression that I was upset with you. I wasn't. And you're right, we ALL need to start being able to discuss these things.

Carousel,

I wish I knew the answer. The form that I went through on their website (the one I linked to above) has a box to tick if you want a response. I ticked that and I also mentioned in my email that I would like a response - but I've still heard absolutely nothing. In fact, the silence is rather deafening. If I still haven't heard by Monday, I'm going to write again and I will probably also write via snail mail. Might even ring the so-and-so's up as well. The BBC can really be arrogant sometimes.

Have you sent a complaint about this? If you have, let me know if you hear back. That goes for any of you... thanks.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

I appreciate that you feel the BBC should have questioned the ruling made by the courts and used this case as an opportunity to promote the use of condoms.

With regards to the sentence, the BBC cannot take a stance or hold an opinion on any public issue; indeed it is specifically prohibited from expressing a view of its own on any issue with the exception of those specifically related to broadcasting. To do so would be contrary to the Corporation's Charter.

With regards to the importance of the use of condoms, the BBC actively encourages the practice of safe sex and are currently running a 'Bare All' summer campaign which provides free condoms and information. You can find more information at the following website:

Everybody on here has good points. Its great that we debate this subject. But its, as they say, preaching to the choir. The debate needs to happen 'out there'. When we hear these stories on the news, we should contact them and tell them how we feel. Else its another chance lost to educate the media.

That said, I believe in disclosure. I also believe everyone is responsibe for taking care of themselves. But the fact is some people are just too unimformed, or too stupid, or too whatever to play it safe. They shouldn't have to suffer this disease for a moment of ignorance. After all, nobody wore seatbelts until it became the law. It would be nice it it was illegal to have sex without a condom with a stranger, and some other cases. That would be an invasion of privacy however.

Where I live, in Texas, the conservative gevernment here believes that making legislation to criminalize the HIV positive person having sex makes it look like to the public that they are actually doing something about AIDS, without having to spend any money on prevention.

Ann, On one hand you (rightly) complain that the educational message is not getting out. On the other, you say the responsibility is 50/50. Make up your mind.Donít forget the cohorts of uninformed adolescents who werenít properly taught about sex let alone HIV.I agree with Thomas. The metaphor I imagine is telling someone to go for a walk through a minefield. Aphaun

Its never too late to initiate safer sex education and prevention. Adolescent or adult, any sexually active person has the responsibility to protect him/herself. Ignorance is not an acceptable excuse, not when the stakes are this high.

Quote

The metaphor I imagine is telling someone to go for a walk through a minefield.

An apt metaphor. When someone is informed of the risks, and choose to walk through that minefield, then they are assuming the risks involved. If people are not informed, it does not make the minefield go away.

Sex is an adult choice, with accompanying adult responsibilities and adult risks.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

So ... taking your metaphor into the realm of sexuality, it's therefore the sexual aggressor's responsibility to make certain his/her partner is informed of all STDs, their transmission and prevention? In a world where we presume informed consent, it seems logical that each person is responsible for his/her sexual health.

And when all is said and done, finger-pointing and incarceration will not restore someone's HIV status. The resources that go into prosecuting cases like this would fund a great deal of education and prevention programs - based on negotiated risk, risk reduction, condom use, and personal responsibility.

Are you a person infected/affected with/by HIV? It would be great if you'd post some introduction .

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."